ReviewEcology and evolution2019
Framing pictures: A conceptual framework to identify and correct for biases in detection probability of camera traps enabling multi-species comparison.
Review in Ecology and evolution, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
31 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spatiotemporal Patterns of Five Sympatric Ungulates in the Tangjiahe National Nature Reserve, Sichuan, China.Biology · 2026Article
- Fine-Scale Habitat Associations and Diel Activity Patterns of Camera-Detected Alpine Musk Deer (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Seasonal Coat Colour Moult and Mismatch in Ezo Mountain Hares (Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Global Camera Trapping Inventory (GCTI) v.1.0: A worldwide inventory of camera-trapping studies for spatial biodiversity analysis.Zoological research · 2026Article
- Predictors of extinction risk in large tropical forest mammals: From global to local.Science advances · 2026Article
- Short-distance detectability in camera trap surveys: implications for population assessment.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2026Article
- Habitat overlap of Canada lynx and sympatric mesopredators increases following cyclical reduction in primary prey.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- SiMPL Wildlife Magnets: A Camera Trap Tool for Detecting All Creatures Great and Small.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Unusual Suspects: Detection Probability Covaries With Vegetation Productivity and Rainfall for Camera Survey of African Leopards (Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Chimpanzees (Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Fox on the Run-Cheaper Camera Traps Fail to Detect Fast-Moving Mesopredators: Assessing the Differences in Mesopredator Detection Efficacy Among Different Camera Trap Models.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Spatial and Temporal Relationships Between Roe and Red Deer in an Alpine Area.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Cameras orEcology and evolution · 2024Article
- An Ecologist-Friendly R Workflow for Expediting Species-Level Classification of Camera Trap Images.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- The moon's influence on the activity of tropical forest mammals.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Bottom-up rather than top-down mechanisms determine mesocarnivore interactions in Norway.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Limited spatiotemporal niche partitioning among mesocarnivores in Gorongosa National Park, Mozambique.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Land cover preferences and spatiotemporal associations of ungulates within a Scottish mammal community.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- A simple framework for maximizing camera trap detections using experimental trials.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2023Article
- Assessing trends in population size of three unmarked species: A comparison of a multi-species N-mixture model and random encounter models.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Obtaining reliable species observations is of great importance in animal ecology and wildlife conservation. An increasing number of studies use camera traps (CTs) to study wildlife communities, and an increasing effort is made to make better use and reuse of the large amounts of data that are produced. It is in these circumstances that it becomes paramount to correct for the species- and study-specific variation in imperfect detection within CTs. We reviewed the literature and used our own experience to compile a list of factors that affect CT detection of animals. We did this within a conceptual framework of six distinct scales separating out the influences of (a) animal characteristics, (b) CT specifications, (c) CT set-up protocols, and (d) environmental variables. We identified 40 factors that can potentially influence the detection of animals by CTs at these six scales. Many of these factors were related to only a few overarching parameters. Most of the animal characteristics scale with body mass and diet type, and most environmental characteristics differ with season or latitude such that remote sensing products like NDVI could be used as a proxy index to capture this variation. Factors that influence detection at the microsite and camera scales are probably the most important in determining CT detection of animals. The type of study and specific research question will determine which factors should be corrected. Corrections can be done by directly adjusting the CT metric of interest or by using covariates in a statistical framework. Our conceptual framework can be used to design better CT studies and help when analyzing CT data. Furthermore, it provides an overview of which factors should be reported in CT studies to make them repeatable, comparable, and their data reusable. This should greatly improve the possibilities for global scale analyses of (reused) CT data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.